I was in the moment and hoping the wine would still show ok. It was less than $100 so live and learn.
Addressing the other note, if an auction site usually describes the bottle condition if not perfect, I assumed (mistakenly) that the bottle was in fact in good condition.
I am not faulting the auction house with anything except not describing the bottle as it turned out but hey its an auction site and I know I have little recourse.
They did say I could have done something if I hadn’t opened it. Not sure what would have happened with a remove capsule…
Chalked up to live and learn, I still want to drink a good 79 Chave!!
Buying older wines at auction always presents risk. In my experiences I have had some that disappointed and some that pleasantly surprised. I have always found Acker very accommodating, If you are not a heavy hitter, my suggestion is to stay with one auction house, consolidate your spending and develop a relationship. It will help when you run into problems.
Your assumption is quite reasonable IMO Drew. A lack of a description, particularly something like obvious seepage, should be indicated if that is the auction companies normal practice. For a 1979 wine, would not expect perfect condition, but would at least expect a reasonable shot at it being drinkable, the appropriate fill, color, etc. for the age.
Having opened it already, and under $100, probably a healthy way to look at it, just live and learn. For future reference, would ask the auction house if this is their normal practice, to exclude a description for some reason, or was it simply a mistake? You certainly don’t want the problem to repeat itself if you plan to buy from them again . . .
